Félix Robles wrote:
>> Why has a GPL programmer more rights than a musician?
>> They should have the same freedoms, but with certain differences because
> software has some differences with music, movies or books. Those are the
> freedoms a GPL license gives, according to GNU:
>>> - The freedom to run the program, for any purpose (freedom 0).
> - The freedom to study how the program works, and change it to make it
> do
> what you wish (freedom 1). Access to the source code is a precondition
> for
> this.
> - The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor
> (freedom 2).
> - The freedom to improve the program, and release your improvements
> (and
> modified versions in general) to the public, so that the whole
> community
> benefits (freedom 3). Access to the source code is a precondition for
> this.
>>> The reason to make the code avaible with the software is that otherwise it
> would be very difficult to improve the software. But you don't need any
> code
> to modify a song or a book for example, that's the main difference. So a
> GPL
> programmer does not have more rights than a musician, he has exactly the
> same freedoms.
So how do you improve a bassline in a song without having the single sound
tracks? How do you replace the vocals?
The same way you can modify software without having the sources... It's
possible, but a pretty hard job.
And as far as I know, Pirates don't want to force everybody to release the
sources for every products he sells. Or do we want this?
Christian